Please be VERY VERY Careful
- Thread starter Hawkeye
- Start date
- Status
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
That is some serious anxiety.
You do realize that guns don't hurt people, PEOPLE hurt people, I'm sure.
I rarely allow my kids to go to someone else's house for a playdate anyway, but if I do, my major concern isn't, nor has it ever been weapons. My kids have been taught literally since birth NOT to touch a firearm, and if another child does, to immediately remove themselves from the area and to tell an adult.
There's not a live round in this house, currently, nor are there firing pins in any of the real weapons.
Education is integral when it comes to weaponry, and you'd be surprised how many people in small towns across Texas have taught their kids better than to play with guns. It's usually the urban residents who have issues with kids playing with guns...because they're never taught NOT to. :/
Originally Posted by Katial8r
This is the exact reason why I moved from Texas back to Canada ( I lived there for 2 1/2 yrs). I could not live like that and I especially couldn't stand to bring up my two children there. I was scared of intruders, robbers, thieves. etc but the combination of those, and the amount of people walking around carring guns for protection (and the possibility of those people accidentally shooting someone) was too much for me to handle. I was so scared to let my children have play dates because of the possibility of them finding a gun in a drawer and think it is a toy. I know most people with guns are responsible, but there have been times where people do get careless. Living in fear of all those possibilities drove me to a breakdown. 
Please don't get me wrong. Texas is a gorgeous state and the people there are great! I just don't have the guts to live there. |
That is some serious anxiety.
You do realize that guns don't hurt people, PEOPLE hurt people, I'm sure.
I rarely allow my kids to go to someone else's house for a playdate anyway, but if I do, my major concern isn't, nor has it ever been weapons. My kids have been taught literally since birth NOT to touch a firearm, and if another child does, to immediately remove themselves from the area and to tell an adult.
There's not a live round in this house, currently, nor are there firing pins in any of the real weapons.
Education is integral when it comes to weaponry, and you'd be surprised how many people in small towns across Texas have taught their kids better than to play with guns. It's usually the urban residents who have issues with kids playing with guns...because they're never taught NOT to. :/
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
The harder it is to obtain a fire arm through reduction in availibility, the less chance a fire arm would be used.
Sure there are those who would still use fire arms. But an automatic death sentance for firing a shot would deter many from using a fire arm. And those that still choose to use them, would be using them in crimes where they probably would have had used guns anyways.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
There's no such thing as gun control. There is only "honest criminal control". :shrug: |
The harder it is to obtain a fire arm through reduction in availibility, the less chance a fire arm would be used.
Sure there are those who would still use fire arms. But an automatic death sentance for firing a shot would deter many from using a fire arm. And those that still choose to use them, would be using them in crimes where they probably would have had used guns anyways.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
Is that really the type of country you want to live in?
| Originally Posted by Raerae
The harder it is to obtain a fire arm through reduction in availibility, the less chance a fire arm would be used. Sure there are those who would still use fire arms. But an automatic death sentance for firing a shot would deter many from using a fire arm. And those that still choose to use them, would be using them in crimes where they probably would have had used guns anyways. |
Is that really the type of country you want to live in?
Shimmer
Well-known member
A government that doesn't allow its civilians to arm themselves is a government intent upon opressing those people...because without armament they have no means to protect themselves from people like Hussein, the Taliban, whatever, from entering into power.
Things can change to create a strong (too strong) central government and the people have no means to defend their way of life.
Obviously that's an extreme case, but had the point still stands.
Things can change to create a strong (too strong) central government and the people have no means to defend their way of life.
Obviously that's an extreme case, but had the point still stands.
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
We wouldn't have a chance to stand up against the American government anyways if they were intent on opressing us. The time has long since passes where a civilian "army" has a chance against the types of weapons employed by the military in the modern age.
Parhaps back in the day when Armies employed the same weaponry that was availible to civilians you would have a point. But that hasn't been the case since military technology far surpassed the technology availible to civilians.
Quote:
Yes, we saw how well the civilians prevented Hussein, and the Taliban from entering into power. Military coups are called, "MILITARY" for a reason. It is only with military weaponry that they are possible.
[/quote]Things can change to create a strong (too strong) central government and the people have no means to defend their way of life.
Obviously that's an extreme case, but had the point still stands.
[/quote]
We already have a strong central government. Were it to suddenly decide to not support our way of life, and if the soldiers in our military decide to go along and support it, our way of life in a instant, would cease to exist.
Thats the only hope we have, is that no signifigant portion of the active military would go along with it. As they are the only ones who could protect us. Not a bunch of Texans with handguns and rifles.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
A government that doesn't allow its civilians to arm themselves is a government intent upon opressing those people... |
We wouldn't have a chance to stand up against the American government anyways if they were intent on opressing us. The time has long since passes where a civilian "army" has a chance against the types of weapons employed by the military in the modern age.
Parhaps back in the day when Armies employed the same weaponry that was availible to civilians you would have a point. But that hasn't been the case since military technology far surpassed the technology availible to civilians.
Quote:
| because without armament they have no means to protect themselves from people like Hussein, the Taliban, whatever, from entering into power. |
Yes, we saw how well the civilians prevented Hussein, and the Taliban from entering into power. Military coups are called, "MILITARY" for a reason. It is only with military weaponry that they are possible.
[/quote]Things can change to create a strong (too strong) central government and the people have no means to defend their way of life.
Obviously that's an extreme case, but had the point still stands.
We already have a strong central government. Were it to suddenly decide to not support our way of life, and if the soldiers in our military decide to go along and support it, our way of life in a instant, would cease to exist.
Thats the only hope we have, is that no signifigant portion of the active military would go along with it. As they are the only ones who could protect us. Not a bunch of Texans with handguns and rifles.
Willa
Well-known member
I don't feel opressed...
Here in canada, if you want a gun, you need a ''permit'' (sorry don't know the word) and often people just have hunting guns.
People with guns here : Police and criminals.
Ordinary people like me dont feel the need of having one.
I could also say that most of the people never saw a real gun...
Here in canada, if you want a gun, you need a ''permit'' (sorry don't know the word) and often people just have hunting guns.
People with guns here : Police and criminals.
Ordinary people like me dont feel the need of having one.
I could also say that most of the people never saw a real gun...
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
Yup, I think it makes the line fairly obvious whe it comes to who's who.
I personally woulnd't have a problem with police having the authority to shoot first in that type of a situation eigther. Considering if you possessed a weapon in a society where they were illegal excluding law enforcement and military, it's obvious you own it for the intent of causing harm to others.
| Originally Posted by Willa
People with guns here : Police and criminals. |
Yup, I think it makes the line fairly obvious whe it comes to who's who.
I personally woulnd't have a problem with police having the authority to shoot first in that type of a situation eigther. Considering if you possessed a weapon in a society where they were illegal excluding law enforcement and military, it's obvious you own it for the intent of causing harm to others.
Hawkeye
Well-known member
I couldn't imagine anyone being that afraid of an object. I would only be afraid of the person behind the object. An object can do nothing unless there is a person causing the motion. I have to agree with Shimmer a country without allowance of the right to bear arms faces a very dangerous situation on a very individual level. Having very little regard for the personal decisions of the individual and forcing the "greater good" or "Common good" on people thereby not allowing them to have a choice in the matter.
Where does the individuality go?
Where does the individuality go?
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
HAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAA
Ok.
Quote:
You just made my point. A weak people can't defend themselves.
Quote:
Soldiers dont' have a choice to "support" it or "not support" it. They don't get to pick and choose their missions. They do what they're told when they're told.
Quote:
You're quite mistaken actually. You'd be surprised at the interprising capability of the tinfoil hat wearers. You think the military is the only entity capable of procuring heavy duty equipment, firepower, man power, large explosives, etc.?
No.
And, unfortunately, our soldiers are sadly lacking in training for fighting guerilla warfare. The government turns on the people of the US, you'd be surprised at perhaps not the outcome, but the tenacity with which the people who fought back did so, as well as the ferocity and capability.
| Originally Posted by Raerae
We wouldn't have a chance to stand up against the American government anyways if they were intent on opressing us. The time has long since passes where a civilian "army" has a chance against the types of weapons employed by the military in the modern age. Parhaps back in the day when Armies employed the same weaponry that was availible to civilians you would have a point. But that hasn't been the case since military technology far surpassed the technology availible to civilians. |
HAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAA
Ok.
Quote:
| Yes, we saw how well the civilians prevented Hussein, and the Taliban from entering into power. Military coups are called, "MILITARY" for a reason. It is only with military weaponry that they are possible. |
You just made my point. A weak people can't defend themselves.
Quote:
| We already have a strong central government. Were it to suddenly decide to not support our way of life, and if the soldiers in our military decide to go along and support it, our way of life in a instant, would cease to exist. |
Soldiers dont' have a choice to "support" it or "not support" it. They don't get to pick and choose their missions. They do what they're told when they're told.
Quote:
| Thats the only hope we have, is that no signifigant portion of the active military would go along with it. As they are the only ones who could protect us. Not a bunch of Texans with handguns and rifles. |
You're quite mistaken actually. You'd be surprised at the interprising capability of the tinfoil hat wearers. You think the military is the only entity capable of procuring heavy duty equipment, firepower, man power, large explosives, etc.?
No.
And, unfortunately, our soldiers are sadly lacking in training for fighting guerilla warfare. The government turns on the people of the US, you'd be surprised at perhaps not the outcome, but the tenacity with which the people who fought back did so, as well as the ferocity and capability.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
You need a permit here to carry a concealed weapon, and IIRC (I'd have to check though), you're supposed to register your weapon.
| Originally Posted by Willa
I don't feel opressed... Here in canada, if you want a gun, you need a ''permit'' (sorry don't know the word) and often people just have hunting guns. People with guns here : Police and criminals. Ordinary people like me dont feel the need of having one. I could also say that most of the people never saw a real gun... |
You need a permit here to carry a concealed weapon, and IIRC (I'd have to check though), you're supposed to register your weapon.
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
Very intelligent and well thought out.
Quote:
Handguns and other types of weaponry were never illegal in those countries. So how exactly did having firearms prevent Hussein or the Talibal from taking control of the country? Oh right, it didn't.
But that was your point right? Civilians dont need weaponry? I'm glad we agree.
Quote:
Actually thats incorrect. When it comes to fighting your own people, soldiers have on countless occasions chosen to not support the government or their commanding officers, and instead have supported their families and friends. French Revolution is a perfect example.
Quote:
Yes, you might be able to engage in a insurgency like we see in Iraq. But as far as actually "controlling" the country, the tinfoil hat wearers dont have a chance. And any type of large gathering of "terrorists" would be swiflty dealt with by superior firepower.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
HAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAA Ok. |
Very intelligent and well thought out.
Quote:
| You just made my point. A weak people can't defend themselves. |
Handguns and other types of weaponry were never illegal in those countries. So how exactly did having firearms prevent Hussein or the Talibal from taking control of the country? Oh right, it didn't.
But that was your point right? Civilians dont need weaponry? I'm glad we agree.
Quote:
| Soldiers dont' have a choice to "support" it or "not support" it. They don't get to pick and choose their missions. They do what they're told when they're told. |
Actually thats incorrect. When it comes to fighting your own people, soldiers have on countless occasions chosen to not support the government or their commanding officers, and instead have supported their families and friends. French Revolution is a perfect example.
Quote:
| You're quite mistaken actually. You'd be surprised at the interprising capability of the tinfoil hat wearers. You think the military is the only entity capable of procuring heavy duty equipment, firepower, man power, large explosives, etc.? No. And, unfortunately, our soldiers are sadly lacking in training for fighting guerilla warfare. The government turns on the people of the US, you'd be surprised at perhaps not the outcome, but the tenacity with which the people who fought back did so, as well as the ferocity and capability. |
Yes, you might be able to engage in a insurgency like we see in Iraq. But as far as actually "controlling" the country, the tinfoil hat wearers dont have a chance. And any type of large gathering of "terrorists" would be swiflty dealt with by superior firepower.
MAC_Pixie04
Well-known member
I think the worst scam I've heard of so far is the Jehovah's Witness/Mormon impostors. They know on your door and tell you that they want to give you a brochure and tell you about a new center of their faith opening up and ask if you're interested. A lot of older people open the door in my neighborhood, for one, they're all lonely elderly women, so they're grateful to talk to anybody during the day, and a lot of kids (unfortunately) open their doors without looking because they think it's another kid or that because it's an adult they have to.
The scam is similar to the UPS guy scam; but it's disgusting that they hide behind a Kingdom Hall brochure and pin or a Church of Latter Day Saints jacket<--these aren't hard to get, my friend's boyfriend went as a mormon for Halloween and his costume was VERY official and convincing.
When they come to my door, I can look out my kitchen window and say that I'm not interested. If they persist, I'll ask them to leave once more. If they continue to persist, I show them that I'm one digit away from calling the police and that it would be wise of them to get the hell off of my property, which usually gets the job done.
When I was about 12, a guy named PJ came up to my door and asked to speak to my dad. He said that my dad used to be his little league coach (which was true) and that he'd invited him over to catch up (which was not true). I said that I couldn't let him in and that he could come back at 5 when my dad was home. I lied and said that my mom was asleep (I was home alone) and not feeling good so nobody could come in. He insisted on waiting on the porch and I kept asking him to just leave and come back when my dad's truck pulled up. He kept looking at me through the window and pacing on the porch. I shut the blinds, locked every door and window to our house and called my dad. My dad told me that he never invited PJ to our house and that he in fact hadn't seen PJ since he was about 13 years old. He said for me to look and see if he was still there, and he was, and he was still trying to look into the window, and the look on his face made me really uncomfortable and scared. My dad said he was gonna leave work early so that he could get home to me, but that it would be some time because of the traffic. I freaked out, I knew it would be more than half an hour before my dad came and I didn't know what I would do for a half an hour while this creep was pacing my front porch. My uncle had just moved around the corner from us, so I called him and asked him to walk by my house and maybe get PJ to leave. About 10 minutes after that I heard scuffling and yelling outside my house. My uncle had walked by, seen PJ, asked him what he was doing on our porch and then asked him to leave and PJ pulled a sizeable pocket knife out on my uncle and threatened him. I called the police and when PJ saw me on the phone he panicked and ran away, but he dropped his knife in our yard. The police came and took the knife and when i said "his name was PJ" they knew exactly who I was talking about. They were looking for him for a similar incident weeks prior. He knocked on a kids door to ask if he could use the phone, and the kid let him in and PJ pulled the knife out on the little boy and told him not to scream, or call anybody, then cut their phone line and stole a bunch of little valuables and electronics out of their house, then rode off on the boy's bike. It turned out that PJ was extremely emotionally unstable and very dangerous. If I hadn't been smart enough to know what to do about him being on our porch, he could have done something terrible to me.
Unfortunately, a lot of kids DON'T know that it's not okay to let someone in when they're home alone. And it's sad that we live in a society where you need expensive home security and surveillance on your front door before you can open it. Or that some of us feel the need to answer our door with a loaded weapon or other means of protection.
The scam is similar to the UPS guy scam; but it's disgusting that they hide behind a Kingdom Hall brochure and pin or a Church of Latter Day Saints jacket<--these aren't hard to get, my friend's boyfriend went as a mormon for Halloween and his costume was VERY official and convincing.
When they come to my door, I can look out my kitchen window and say that I'm not interested. If they persist, I'll ask them to leave once more. If they continue to persist, I show them that I'm one digit away from calling the police and that it would be wise of them to get the hell off of my property, which usually gets the job done.
When I was about 12, a guy named PJ came up to my door and asked to speak to my dad. He said that my dad used to be his little league coach (which was true) and that he'd invited him over to catch up (which was not true). I said that I couldn't let him in and that he could come back at 5 when my dad was home. I lied and said that my mom was asleep (I was home alone) and not feeling good so nobody could come in. He insisted on waiting on the porch and I kept asking him to just leave and come back when my dad's truck pulled up. He kept looking at me through the window and pacing on the porch. I shut the blinds, locked every door and window to our house and called my dad. My dad told me that he never invited PJ to our house and that he in fact hadn't seen PJ since he was about 13 years old. He said for me to look and see if he was still there, and he was, and he was still trying to look into the window, and the look on his face made me really uncomfortable and scared. My dad said he was gonna leave work early so that he could get home to me, but that it would be some time because of the traffic. I freaked out, I knew it would be more than half an hour before my dad came and I didn't know what I would do for a half an hour while this creep was pacing my front porch. My uncle had just moved around the corner from us, so I called him and asked him to walk by my house and maybe get PJ to leave. About 10 minutes after that I heard scuffling and yelling outside my house. My uncle had walked by, seen PJ, asked him what he was doing on our porch and then asked him to leave and PJ pulled a sizeable pocket knife out on my uncle and threatened him. I called the police and when PJ saw me on the phone he panicked and ran away, but he dropped his knife in our yard. The police came and took the knife and when i said "his name was PJ" they knew exactly who I was talking about. They were looking for him for a similar incident weeks prior. He knocked on a kids door to ask if he could use the phone, and the kid let him in and PJ pulled the knife out on the little boy and told him not to scream, or call anybody, then cut their phone line and stole a bunch of little valuables and electronics out of their house, then rode off on the boy's bike. It turned out that PJ was extremely emotionally unstable and very dangerous. If I hadn't been smart enough to know what to do about him being on our porch, he could have done something terrible to me.
Unfortunately, a lot of kids DON'T know that it's not okay to let someone in when they're home alone. And it's sad that we live in a society where you need expensive home security and surveillance on your front door before you can open it. Or that some of us feel the need to answer our door with a loaded weapon or other means of protection.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Quote:
Laughter is always a good response to a joke, is it not?
Quote:
You're also talking about a people who were never given, ever, in their history, the same rights and privileges Americans have been given. They were, and always have been, weak, and without the ability to muster.
Quote:
The French Revolution and the American Military and its indoctrination of the soldier, as well as the soldierization of the soldier, are wholly different things.
Choosing not to support something really isn't an option when a member of the US military...unless it's an unlawful order. Now, for NOW, being told to attack US citizens is probably an unlawful order. But if those laws change? What then? At that point, the soldier has no choice. And, make an example out of a few dissidents, you're not likely to have much of a disagreement.
Not saying that's coming, just saying it's a possibility.
Quote:
LMAO. That's great.
| Originally Posted by Raerae
Very intelligent and well thought out. |
Laughter is always a good response to a joke, is it not?
Quote:
| Handguns and other types of weaponry were never illegal in those countries. So how exactly did having firearms prevent Hussein or the Talibal from taking control of the country? Oh right, it didn't. But that was your point right? Civilians dont need weaponry? I'm glad we agree. |
You're also talking about a people who were never given, ever, in their history, the same rights and privileges Americans have been given. They were, and always have been, weak, and without the ability to muster.
Quote:
| Actually thats incorrect. When it comes to fighting your own people, soldiers have on countless occasions chosen to not support the government or their commanding officers, and instead have supported their families and friends. French Revolution is a perfect example. |
The French Revolution and the American Military and its indoctrination of the soldier, as well as the soldierization of the soldier, are wholly different things.
Choosing not to support something really isn't an option when a member of the US military...unless it's an unlawful order. Now, for NOW, being told to attack US citizens is probably an unlawful order. But if those laws change? What then? At that point, the soldier has no choice. And, make an example out of a few dissidents, you're not likely to have much of a disagreement.
Not saying that's coming, just saying it's a possibility.
Quote:
| Yes, you might be able to engage in a insurgency like we see in Iraq. But as far as actually "controlling" the country, the tinfoil hat wearers dont have a chance. And any type of large gathering of "terrorists" would be swiflty dealt with by superior firepower. |
LMAO. That's great.
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
Did you hear the one about the guy shot with his own gun? It's hilarious.
Quote:
And where exactly are you going to be able to muster in America in the event that the government suddenly decides to become a police state (and has a military willing to enforce it's laws)?
Quote:
Everyone has a choice. A soldier always has the choice, to follow, or not follow and order. The chain of command only has power if those they are in charge of, support the chain of command.
Quote:
At least we agree your argument is kinda funny.
| Originally Posted by Shimmer
Laughter is always a good response to a joke, is it not? |
Did you hear the one about the guy shot with his own gun? It's hilarious.
Quote:
| You're also talking about a people who were never given, ever, in their history, the same rights and privileges Americans have been given. They were, and always have been, weak, and without the ability to muster. |
And where exactly are you going to be able to muster in America in the event that the government suddenly decides to become a police state (and has a military willing to enforce it's laws)?
Quote:
| The French Revolution and the American Military and its indoctrination of the soldier, as well as the soldierization of the soldier, are wholly different things. Choosing not to support something really isn't an option when a member of the US military...unless it's an unlawful order. Now, for NOW, being told to attack US citizens is probably an unlawful order. But if those laws change? What then? At that point, the soldier has no choice. And, make an example out of a few dissidents, you're not likely to have much of a disagreement. Not saying that's coming, just saying it's a possibility. |
Everyone has a choice. A soldier always has the choice, to follow, or not follow and order. The chain of command only has power if those they are in charge of, support the chain of command.
Quote:
| LMAO. That's great. |
At least we agree your argument is kinda funny.
Raerae
Well-known member
Quote:
Many people dont see the need to have a choice with regards to something, who's only purpose, is death.
And thats kinda of a useless statement Hawkeye, as the government makes MANY choices for it's people. There are plenty of things the goverment does not allow, that plenty of people dont agree with.
Stem cells, suicide, drugs, etc.
| Originally Posted by Hawkeye
I'm still trying to figure out how anyone could deny their freedom of choice and allow some government to choose for them.
|
Many people dont see the need to have a choice with regards to something, who's only purpose, is death.
And thats kinda of a useless statement Hawkeye, as the government makes MANY choices for it's people. There are plenty of things the goverment does not allow, that plenty of people dont agree with.
Stem cells, suicide, drugs, etc.
Shimmer
Well-known member
Seriously are there any other civil liberties we'd like to give up?
How 'bout voting? Obviously our education and experience is nowhere near vast enough to handle the weight of decisions like that...it'd be better for the nation to allow the people up on the Hill to handle that.
Or, I KNOW! Double Jeopardy! Let's do away with that...I mean shit, that first punishment? It was NOTHING. You need another go 'round to really get the message through your noggin. Talk about a crime deterrent...one speeding ticket and you pay for it the rest of your life!
oooo. You were found innocent? Bullshit. Fuck that, we're going to bring another jury in and redo this bitch because there's NO WAY you're innocent. Hold the phone. We'll keep going until we get you buddy.
How 'bout voting? Obviously our education and experience is nowhere near vast enough to handle the weight of decisions like that...it'd be better for the nation to allow the people up on the Hill to handle that.
Or, I KNOW! Double Jeopardy! Let's do away with that...I mean shit, that first punishment? It was NOTHING. You need another go 'round to really get the message through your noggin. Talk about a crime deterrent...one speeding ticket and you pay for it the rest of your life!
oooo. You were found innocent? Bullshit. Fuck that, we're going to bring another jury in and redo this bitch because there's NO WAY you're innocent. Hold the phone. We'll keep going until we get you buddy.
- Status
